pirelli threatening to quit F1 at the end of 2013

But the FIA can do that - on grounds of safety, that always has been possible.

EDIT: But that's not the point, izzit? The point is that Pirelli is threatening to quit F1 and some posters are applauding that... with which, methinks, they are vastly underestimating how messed up the tyre and rules-situation is WITHOUT Pirelli, testgate andsoforth...

It's difficult when the teams and tyre suppliers are saying there's no safety issue though.

and for good reasons too, look at yesterday, even freely giving sets of test tires doesn't do jack shit, each team runs individual tests, sometimes giving rookies chance (which i'm not saying is bad), but rookies won't push,will they???

then there is the issue of weather, and most importantly, teams willingness to use those sets as they know they won't race on those.

also bare in mind the cost associated with making/transporting all those sets and then having a bad weather session.

i still firmly believe that pirelli should've bought the HRT's.

it's a different thing, running a Pirelli tyre test, and a different thing abandoning your race prep during a race weekend to do work for Pirelli. Surely you understand that ? Pirelli gave out prototypes of the 2013 tyres in Brazil last year. Do you seriously think Red Bull and Ferrari put the championship on hold for FP1 so they could gather data for Pirelli?

If Pirelli need to test they can book a cicuit a couple of days after a race, bring a couple of trucks of tyres and let the teams evaluate them. And stick one FIA scrutineer in each garage to enforce "park ferme" in the test, ie to ensure teams don't run their own component tests, they run Pirelli tests. But Pirelli don't want that, they said so. No big tests, we just want to test with one car.

To be replaced by what, Michelin cheese tyres? the FIA brief will remain the same, whoever is building the tyres.

It seems that Michelin is indeed interested in an F1 comeback. However they are not keen on building crap tyres:

"Despite being silent officially, the Frenchman have contacted the teams already a month ago and are interested in a meeting with the team bosses. So far though they have always emphasized that they refuse to build, like Pirelli, poorly durable tyres for F1, because they fear an image damage.

If Pirelli need to test they can book a cicuit a couple of days after a race, bring a couple of trucks of tyres and let the teams evaluate them. And stick one FIA scrutineer in each garage to enforce "park ferme" in the test, ie to ensure teams don't run their own component tests, they run Pirelli tests. But Pirelli don't want that, they said so. No big tests, we just want to test with one car.

that's something Pirelli and the teams can sort out, but since it would be a Pirelli test Pirelli would cover the bulk of the cost. Isn't that what we are told happens when Pirelli runs one car be it a Lotus or an ex-Toyota?

that's something Pirelli and the teams can sort out, but since it would be a Pirelli test Pirelli would cover the bulk of the cost. Isn't that what we are told happens when Pirelli runs one car be it a Lotus or an ex-Toyota?

it's a different thing, running a Pirelli tyre test, and a different thing abandoning your race prep during a race weekend to do work for Pirelli. Surely you understand that ? Pirelli gave out prototypes of the 2013 tyres in Brazil last year. Do you seriously think Red Bull and Ferrari put the championship on hold for FP1 so they could gather data for Pirelli?

If Pirelli need to test they can book a cicuit a couple of days after a race, bring a couple of trucks of tyres and let the teams evaluate them. And stick one FIA scrutineer in each garage to enforce "park ferme" in the test, ie to ensure teams don't run their own component tests, they run Pirelli tests. But Pirelli don't want that, they said so. No big tests, we just want to test with one car.

Can you really not see why that would be massively preferable for Pirelli (or any tyre supplier)?Testing on 1 car gives meaningful data for comparisons to be made. As soon as you test on 2 cars you introduce countless new variables, which means you effectively have to run the same tests on both cars. Which means you need twice the equipment, twice the staff - do they have the equipment and staff to test with 2 teams simultaneously? I doubt it.To test with 10 teams at once? That would be ludicrous.The initial tests aren't a case of 'let the teams evaluate them.' That comes later.

Pirelli can't run initial data-gathering tests with all the teams simultaneously. What they can do is run initial tests - evaluating different compounds and constructions - with 1 car (wherever that car comes from) and then, after crunching the data, give sample proposed tyres to all the teams to run. In other words 'let the teams evaluate them.'

Clearly there's an issue with using a 2013 Merc. But just saying 'they should do all their testing with 10 teams' is naive in the extreme.

Ask Pirelli how many tests they need together with the dates and the places of the tests.

Ask the teams which ones are willing to lend cars and drivers. Between these you draw which ones are gonna test when and where. Make sure you have FIA personnel in every test to guarantee that teams are not testing anything else and all data are going solely to Pirelli.

Clearly there's an issue with using a 2013 Merc. But just saying 'they should do all their testing with 10 teams' is naive in the extreme.

So how many single team tests did Bridgestone run between 2007 and 2010? And that included a huge change in the tyres, grooved to slicks. The had a trouble race (Nurburgring 2007 where F1 cars could barely keep the pace of the pace car due to how wet it was). Did they scamper off to Mugello with a 2007 Ferrari to test?

I think it's far more naive to take every PR spin Hembery puts on everything as gospel.

Pirelli can blame their PR nightmare on themselves. They had one task, make the tyres. Instead we got constant attention whoring, even last season they had to hand out statements left right and give their opinions on the spiciness of the show, guesses on who's gonna win this weekend etc. Even now they're playing the media game and trying to affect decisions by bitching to the media.

The guys who provide some of the telemetry equipment to FIA have had way worse issues than Pirelli; their equipment has been turned off in the races because it doesn't work, leaving drivers to manually judge when to deploy Kers etc., and yet they are not in the center of a media storm every second sending out press releases and giving controversial interviews.

Ask Pirelli how many tests they need together with the dates and the places of the tests.Ask the teams which ones are willing to lend cars and drivers. Between these you draw which ones are gonna test when and where. Make sure you have FIA personnel in every test to guarantee that teams are not testing anything else and all data are going solely to Pirelli.

they have tried that and all they could agree on was to propose 2010 LotusF1 car ... and even then now they accuse LotusF1 of gaining advantage (yes, with a car that has F-duct). so good luck with that.

So how many single team tests did Bridgestone run between 2007 and 2010? And that included a huge change in the tyres, grooved to slicks. The had a trouble race (Nurburgring 2007 where F1 cars could barely keep the pace of the pace car due to how wet it was). Did they scamper off to Mugello with a 2007 Ferrari to test?

I think it's far more naive to take every PR spin Hembery puts on everything as gospel.

That would be naive too.But you don't address the points I made.What I'm saying is not about Merc or Pirelli - it's about how you control variables in order to gain useful data. If you understand how that works you won't suggest running 10 team tests simultaneously is a good way to go.

Bridgestone had a wealth of data to draw on, and didn't have the brief Pirelli have.I've no idea how many single-team tests they conducted though - maybe you can enlighten me.

and for good reasons too, look at yesterday, even freely giving sets of test tires doesn't do jack shit, each team runs individual tests, sometimes giving rookies chance (which i'm not saying is bad), but rookies won't push,will they???

then there is the issue of weather, and most importantly, teams willingness to use those sets as they know they won't race on those.

also bare in mind the cost associated with making/transporting all those sets and then having a bad weather session.

i still firmly believe that pirelli should've bought the HRT's.

Hi eronrules, don't take it personally, I'm not picking at you, just choosing your post, because it makes some points worth to comment on.

- it has been said before, and is nothing new or earthshaking, but the current situation really reflects the "state of the affairs" in F1- no one gives a s.... about the sport, everyone is just busy gutting it for their own petty reasons/advantage- people seem unable or at least unwilling to find a solution, their is no constructive dialog, just threats and fist banging- while all the "doctors" still argue ad nausea about what is right and what is wrong, the patient (F1) will possibly die, then after the fact everyone will be so sorry

- as for the tire testing at the GP- IMHO it would take little to make it worthwhile, no big drama- yes the weather is always a risk, but their has been a risk of rain during the Barcelona test as well, then Pirelli would have had all the cost, the risk of exposure/bad PR and no benefit either- I understand while the teams are not keen to waste any of their limited track time for some "tyre testing" while they try to get through their programs, that's pretty predictable- but their is a easy and relative cheap fix for this, declare another 20-40 min test session, only "prototype tyres" can be used, everyone gets 1-2 sets for each car and go.- if costs are so much a concern, you can even limit the number of laps if they feel like, 30 laps or whatever one sees fit.- no one is forces to participate, but I'm reasonable sure, most people would run.- the costs for all involved would be minimal (compared to any other form of testing) and some real advances could be made, do this at 5 GP's a year, will give ample data to develop tyres

- I'm not sure, that transporting these extra tyres would cost that much (more) compared to rent a GP track and all the associated costs for Pirelli (or any manufacturer)- yes the teams will have some additional running costs, but that's what happens anyway if you actually run/test a car, I don't think that 30 min extra running on a weekend would break the bank- the spectators on a Friday, who parted with their hard earned cash for a ticket, get some for running to see, no a bad thing either - IMHO

- While buying the HRT car would have been a possibility, I'm not sure it would "help" them (Pirelli) all that much, just another car which is 3-4 sec off the pace- I'm not 100% convinced that P.H.'s 4 sec off the pace claim for a old(ish) F1 car, holds much water either- seeing that the engine and drive train is basically similar/the same, and that no restrictions in form of rules apply, you can make that thing as fast as you choose, and create any downforce/load profileyou like, sure it would require some effort, but nothing the world has never seen.

- if Pirelli decides to "walk away" or get "kicked out", FIA would not only need to find a replacement for F1, GP2 and GP3 would be most likely affected by such a move as well.- every potential replacement manufacturer, if there is any, holds a very strong hand, and it get's stronger by the day.- would be /will be interesting to see, how much teams will have to pay for a tyre supply deal and how much extra cost the manufacturer would need to spend on marketing (track signage, Paddock club etc.)- maybe not many people will be smiling if they learn that their next years tyre deal cost them 3+ Mill $ instead of 1Mill$ (or whatever the going rate is)- I can't see anyone coming in just "for the love of the sport" and is going to p..... money away in subsidizing a tyre supply with their own money.- I think the argument that MICHELIN would only come if their is competition is overstated, they do many series as single supplier (Porsche Cup, WSR etc.), but I can't see them coming in, spending their own money, just to be in F1. I'm sure they would come, if it makes economical sense to do so. Not sure, if this makes economical sense for the teams too.- all in all F1 doesn't seems to be "sexy" at the moment, manufacturers (tyres and other) don't seem to scramble into a mad rush to be part of it at any cost , the powers to be, may should work on this one

So how many single team tests did Bridgestone run between 2007 and 2010? And that included a huge change in the tyres, grooved to slicks. The had a trouble race (Nurburgring 2007 where F1 cars could barely keep the pace of the pace car due to how wet it was). Did they scamper off to Mugello with a 2007 Ferrari to test?

I think it's far more naive to take every PR spin Hembery puts on everything as gospel.

from indestructable tires of 2005 (no tire change) to slightly racy 2007-2010 tires that bridgestone were asked to make (before 2006, with unlimited testing mind you)

vs

pirelli with no prior F1 tire making (for 20+years) to make tires that degrade faster, yet gives performance (with only limited testing with rusty old cars) .... judge yourself who needs more testing and not given

they have tried that and all they could agree on was to propose 2010 LotusF1 car ... and even then now they accuse LotusF1 of gaining advantage (yes, with a car that has F-duct). so good luck with that.

So they didn't tried that. They tried a completely different approach that was giving an old car from a single team for them to test.

I've said it before and I will say it again: why oh why did the FIA not organise a tyre-test itself? Why try to leave it over to the teams and Pirelli? It's like I write a letter to the council asking if I can build a wall in my garden. And the council writes back" 'Sure, but be sure that your neighbours are okay about it.'

Obvious of course as they would easily know how to do this properly, but FIA/FOM secretly want the fence to be (illegally) built and don't give a tosser if the fence builder takes a hit for it.

Meaning Mercedes gets sorted this year to avoid them dropping its F1 team altogether and becomes a stayer in F1. Pirelli they obviously don't really care about or they would long ago have renewed their contract that the company has already stated is ridiculously overdue.

One would have thought that with Mosely out of FIA these kind of schemes would not happen anymore, but I guess the new leader has a similar loyalty to do what the commercial interests want, as well as maybe also a national and personal interest in both Michelin and Brawn getting the up.

That would be naive too.But you don't address the points I made.What I'm saying is not about Merc or Pirelli - it's about how you control variables in order to gain useful data. If you understand how that works you won't suggest running 10 team tests simultaneously is a good way to go.

Bridgestone had a wealth of data to draw on, and didn't have the brief Pirelli have.I've no idea how many single-team tests they conducted though - maybe you can enlighten me.

Since Pirelli doesn't have access to 2014 cars, and as per Hembery the Mercedes test was for 2014 tyres, running on one car is far more destructive than running on 10. Unless you are trying to tailor your tyres to that specific car of course. Otherwise broader data would enable Pirelli to avoid the farcical situation of this season where Pirelli (blatantly lies) and says the cars just got too quick for the tyres, where pretty much all F1 tech chiefs (including Newey) say there getting close to 2011 levels of downforce and performance.

PS read the Lotus test technical brief. Pirelli just grabs the data from the ECU, it's not like they run Pitot tubes on the cars. So your argument re the complexity of data gathering is invalid. True they would need to debrief 10 drivers at the time instead of one but I am sure, even if the existing engineers that Pirelli has assigned to each team every weekend aren't up to the task, you can design a system where qualitative data from the drivers (which by the way shouldn't carry the same weight as quantitative data from the car) is passed on to you from the teams themselves.

Hi eronrules, don't take it personally, I'm not picking at you, just choosing your post, because it makes some points worth to comment on.

- it has been said before, and is nothing new or earthshaking, but the current situation really reflects the "state of the affairs" in F1- no one gives a s.... about the sport, everyone is just busy gutting it for their own petty reasons/advantage- people seem unable or at least unwilling to find a solution, their is no constructive dialog, just threats and fist banging- while all the "doctors" still argue ad nausea about what is right and what is wrong, the patient (F1) will possibly die, then after the fact everyone will be so sorry

- as for the tire testing at the GP- IMHO it would take little to make it worthwhile, no big drama- yes the weather is always a risk, but their has been a risk of rain during the Barcelona test as well, then Pirelli would have had all the cost, the risk of exposure/bad PR and no benefit either- I understand while the teams are not keen to waste any of their limited track time for some "tyre testing" while they try to get through their programs, that's pretty predictable- but their is a easy and relative cheap fix for this, declare another 20-40 min test session, only "prototype tyres" can be used, everyone gets 1-2 sets for each car and go.- if costs are so much a concern, you can even limit the number of laps if they feel like, 30 laps or whatever one sees fit.- no one is forces to participate, but I'm reasonable sure, most people would run.- the costs for all involved would be minimal (compared to any other form of testing) and some real advances could be made, do this at 5 GP's a year, will give ample data to develop tyres

- I'm not sure, that transporting these extra tyres would cost that much (more) compared to rent a GP track and all the associated costs for Pirelli (or any manufacturer)- yes the teams will have some additional running costs, but that's what happens anyway if you actually run/test a car, I don't think that 30 min extra running on a weekend would break the bank- the spectators on a Friday, who parted with their hard earned cash for a ticket, get some for running to see, no a bad thing either - IMHO

- While buying the HRT car would have been a possibility, I'm not sure it would "help" them (Pirelli) all that much, just another car which is 3-4 sec off the pace- I'm not 100% convinced that P.H.'s 4 sec off the pace claim for a old(ish) F1 car, holds much water either- seeing that the engine and drive train is basically similar/the same, and that no restrictions in form of rules apply, you can make that thing as fast as you choose, and create any downforce/load profileyou like, sure it would require some effort, but nothing the world has never seen.

- if Pirelli decides to "walk away" or get "kicked out", FIA would not only need to find a replacement for F1, GP2 and GP3 would be most likely affected by such a move as well.- every potential replacement manufacturer, if there is any, holds a very strong hand, and it get's stronger by the day.- would be /will be interesting to see, how much teams will have to pay for a tyre supply deal and how much extra cost the manufacturer would need to spend on marketing (track signage, Paddock club etc.)- maybe not many people will be smiling if they learn that their next years tyre deal cost them 3+ Mill $ instead of 1Mill$ (or whatever the going rate is)- I can't see anyone coming in just "for the love of the sport" and is going to p..... money away in subsidizing a tyre supply with their own money.- I think the argument that MICHELIN would only come if their is competition is overstated, they do many series as single supplier (Porsche Cup, WSR etc.), but I can't see them coming in, spending their own money, just to be in F1. I'm sure they would come, if it makes economical sense to do so. Not sure, if this makes economical sense for the teams too.- all in all F1 doesn't seems to be "sexy" at the moment, manufacturers (tyres and other) don't seem to scramble into a mad rush to be part of it at any cost , the powers to be, may should work on this one

we're here to discuss, and i'm glad you picked my post, why would i have hard feelings??

some points though

1. giving extra 20/40 mins with experimental tires sounds fine (and is logical too), but something like this has already been proposed and teams couldn't agree on it. IIRC FI asked that only reserve/test drivers to run such sessions, but others turned them down2. again, if FIA doesn't give them extra engine/Gearbox allowence for such sessions, i doubt any team will put millage on actual racing engines/gearboxes, seeing how tight the allocations are already.3. perhaps buying a HRT wasn't an options comparing the performances, but PH does have some point (not being 4s slower). cars do have different ways of loading it self. take for example blown diffuser/double diffuser/coanda exhaust or how about FRIC suspension??? wing dimensions have changed too, so as engine maps and torque curves. all these makes even 2011 car atleast 20% uncomparable to 2013 car.

about the last paragraph though, i fully agree, all those people wishing pirelli to go doesn't see the whole picture.

Q. Do you think Pirelli - or any tyre manufacturer - have the resources to run 10 tests simultaneously?

That really is yes / no. And the answer really is blindingly obvious.

I think you probably widely overestimate the complexity of tyre test ... Pirelli have a sheet of paper with weights and target loads it gives to the car engineer (team supplied even in the 2010 Lotus case) who chooses a setup that would best approximate the Pirelli requirement. Then Pirelli engineers collect data from the ECU. The same process (minus Pirelli setting the load parameters) happens every single grand prix weekend with 22 cars. The "resources" in terms of personnel are there, Pirelli doesn't run any special rigs on the cars to require more resources. All the resources it needs are the cars and the Pirelli engineers that are already in place in every team garage to evaluate and obtain the raw data.

I think you probably widely overestimate the complexity of tyre test ... Pirelli have a sheet of paper with weights and target loads it gives to the car engineer (team supplied even in the 2010 Lotus case) who chooses a setup that would best approximate the Pirelli requirement. Then Pirelli engineers collect data from the ECU. The same process (minus Pirelli setting the load parameters) happens every single grand prix weekend with 22 cars. The "resources" in terms of personnel are there, Pirelli doesn't run any special rigs on the cars to require more resources. All the resources it needs are the cars and the Pirelli engineers that are already in place in every team garage to evaluate and obtain the raw data.

Are you saying you know what Pirelli did on the Merc and Ferrari tests?If so I'm genuinely interested - what's your source?

we're here to discuss, and i'm glad you picked my post, why would i have hard feelings??

some points though

1. giving extra 20/40 mins with experimental tires sounds fine (and is logical too), but something like this has already been proposed and teams couldn't agree on it. IIRC FI asked that only reserve/test drivers to run such sessions, but others turned them down2. again, if FIA doesn't give them extra engine/Gearbox allowence for such sessions, i doubt any team will put millage on actual racing engines/gearboxes, seeing how tight the allocations are already.3. perhaps buying a HRT wasn't an options comparing the performances, but PH does have some point (not being 4s slower). cars do have different ways of loading it self. take for example blown diffuser/double diffuser/coanda exhaust or how about FRIC suspension??? wing dimensions have changed too, so as engine maps and torque curves. all these makes even 2011 car atleast 20% uncomparable to 2013 car.

about the last paragraph though, i fully agree, all those people wishing pirelli to go doesn't see the whole picture.

- that`s the main issue IMHO, people/teams can't decide anything these days, no one sees the forest for the trees, and his own nose is as far as they can/will look- then if the s... hits the fan, everyone is quick to point out that it's not their fault

- fair point, but shouldn't be too difficult to overcome, AFIK, they change gearboxes (not sue about engines) anyway on Friday, that that shouldn't be too much of an issue - IMHO- still way cheaper, then having to buy an extra engine, just for testing- if someone is really tight on budget, and decides, he can't effort it, he does not have to run- I'm reasonable confident, that if the FIA says, their will be a free test session of 20 min at Friday in Silverstone, only one set of experimental tyres can be used, participation is voluntary, most people/teams would run. I maybe wrong, but it would be worth a try, could kill a few birds with one stone this way.

- if we assume that the idea is a tyre test, then from a tyre perspective it doesn't matter how the load is generated- the tyre doesn't know/nor care if it comes from a DD or wing or whatever- I agree, that their are secondary effects, due to exhaust blowing, as this may as an effect as to which temperatures the (rear tyre) is exposed, but then again, in a open series as F1 any one car will not be representative in this matter. They Pirelli can upgrade their old car to simulate the effects of Exhaust blowing, and at the end of the day, this was less of an issue last year, where it was much more widely used.- how comparable is a 2013 (any) car for 2014 anyway? I have still a bit of sympathy for Pirelli, from a technical perspective, but they have brought a lot of this onto themselves. They have managed to come into F1 after many years on the sidelines, and produce a half decent tyre on short notice. I for one, was expecting them to struggle a lot more with things like delamination/detreading and blistering in their first year, and I would have had some tolerance for this. But this year, IMHO, they just got a bit cocky and to far ahead of themselves with their new construction, no one put a gun onto their head, and forced them to make a tyre like this. After they cope some flak, they tried to blame it onto everyone and their dog, for this part I have little respect. They got it wrong, and they know it, that in itself is not the end of the world, and I'm reasonable sure most people/teams would have some sympathy for this, but I think some (many?) teams/people are a bit "fed up" with Pirellis or better P.H. "in your face" approach.They have pretty much "high jacked" F1 as their "private and exclusive marketing & branding" exercise. With this in mind, some people will have just waited for something like this to happen, and now they are on their own. IMHO ( and it's nothing more then this) Pirelli/P.H. has burned quite a bit of "goodwil" over the last couple of month/weeks. They have known what they signed up for, there was no big change in Sporting Regs from one year to the other, they could have sorted all this issues out before they entered into F1. It did not stop them to do (IMO) a competent job overall in 2011/12, so why now?

- any tyre manufacturer faces the challenge of producing tyres for cars who don't exist yet, once in a while. People testing 2014 LMP (LeMans) tyres right now, even so that none of the cars are ready, that in itself is nothing out of the ordinary, just daily life for a tyre manufacture. Yes ideally, you would want a 2014 car (but then not all 2014 engines/KERS etc. will have the same power characteristic etc.), but we don't life in an "ideal" world, so people will need to make do with what they got, and it's not impossible, you just need to give you some margin for error.- what happened to Pirelli this year, was of their own making, no one else to blame. And it's not only F1, they needed (decided) to change their GP3 compounds as well after the fist race, and that's a spec car you can buy "off the shelve" and go testing with wherever you see fit. That they didn't do it and just assumed, that it would be all alright, is their own decision. To me it looks like, they just got a bit "overconfident" and were trying to make a tyre, were they don't have the technology to make it work. They took the risk (nothing wrong with that) and now they pay the price for it, but trying to blame it an god knows who, is not very classy IMO, and it is this, what "cost" them, probably more then the couple of catastrophic failures we have seen.- If everyone (FIA, teams, Pirelli) is keep mucking around for much longer, their is a fair chance that Pirelli's "but the tyre is safe" statement is put to the test. Let's see what the tenor/PR is when something "bad" has happened. I hope it will not, but you can only kick the can down the road for so long, if their is a big incident, they can't turn around and they "but we didn't know that", their was ample warning.- Let's see which tyres they will run in Spa and Monza and what will happen there, they may just hope for more rain to mitigate the problem.

IMHO everyone in this whole soap opera is guilty and has to take his fair share of the blame, it's F1 as a whole which will suffer from it, and no one will care "who's fault it was" after the kid has fallen into the well.

It could be argued that there might be a connection between the problems with the steel belt tyres and Pirelli only having only out-of-date cars to test on.
I would have assumed that they tested the new constructions properly and I doubt that they would have introduced them if they had any suspicions of the problem.
Unless some of the teams are keeping very quiet about any 'secret' tests from last year, this testing would presumably have been carried out with the test hack, in which case it demonstrates that having a representative car for testing is not intrinsically a bad idea.

Luke warm interest, if any, to become a supplier to F1 circus should give authorities a pause, why it is so, but, having observed business of the F1 for a while, and how absorbed in self-righteous mode key people become, I doubt they will.

What do you think about FIA defining common tyre spec and every team able to look for a suitable supplier as long as the tyres conform to those specs?

Nice idea but the teams would have to pay for their own tyres not the other way round.

If the teams are in on the decision, if they start now they might have a suitable specification by about 2020.If the FIA decide the spec it will have so many holes in it it will only suitable ffor draining sprouts.

Seems Pirelli has some leverage and they are smart to use it, but they wouldn't even need to, if they hadn't have done something wrong in the first place.

Both they and Mercedes have both done something wrong IMO.. as always there is grey area but with this, especially from Mercedes side, it seems like there is less grey area than a trick car part for example.

It's been 2 weeks and I'm already over about reading or hearing about this. It just drags on and on and on..

I don't even really care about the penalty, but some clarity about testing would be nice going forward. And if it eventually brings in a new tyre supplier that could be even better.

I have defended Pirelli in the past but this year, they've gone a step too far IMO. Not with this testing thing specifically but with everything.. and it seems that right now they are in full "poor me the victim" mode.

EDIT: But that's not the point, izzit? The point is that Pirelli is threatening to quit F1 and some posters are applauding that... with which, methinks, they are vastly underestimating how messed up the tyre and rules-situation is WITHOUT Pirelli, testgate andsoforth...

Somehow what this episode shows is that the former FIA president was too opportunistic to consolidate power under the name of FIA. Don't need to rehash what happened after Indy 2005, but seemingly he underestimated the controversy tires could create. And if F1 hasn't run it's course by then, F1 will suffer to sort out the unforeseen consequences of his many questionable decisions.

Had the entire tire contracts not changed, we would not have run into that mess (But we'd have other tire related -gates, as it's customary for teams to complain about anything). But now everybody is stuck in an unhappy place, even the FIA, because it's their responsibility to sort out this issue. Now they do have to compromise because of Pirelli's threat. Teams, race track owners sponsors, etc., if F1 is left without tires, can sue them for breach of contract. And when (not if by now) FIA compromises the result will again be a compromise and not the best for the sport. Well done Max Mosley, not!

I think today, as I do for some time now, that this would be an interesting experiment worthy trying it out.

It would be, if it was at all feasible.It costs a lot of time and money to develop F1 tyres from scratch, so any tyre company willing to stick their head in the lions mouth is going to want paying up front - not sure who is expected to do that. Cannot really see one or more teams getting together to pay Michelin/Bridgstone/Hankook/et al as each one will be trying to shaft the other.

Only option is for each team to choose a different tyre company, not sure there ar that many big enough ones around and am pretty sure at least half of the grid couldn't afford it.

Biggest stumbling block however would be Bernie and CVC. They wont't be able to make money from such an arrangement as there will be no $200m or whatever deals for the exclusive tyre advertising rights at GPs.

It would be, if it was at all feasible.It costs a lot of time and money to develop F1 tyres from scratch, so any tyre company willing to stick their head in the lions mouth is going to want paying up front - not sure who is expected to do that. Cannot really see one or more teams getting together to pay Michelin/Bridgstone/Hankook/et al as each one will be trying to shaft the other.

Only option is for each team to choose a different tyre company, not sure there ar that many big enough ones around and am pretty sure at least half of the grid couldn't afford it.

Biggest stumbling block however would be Bernie and CVC. They wont't be able to make money from such an arrangement as there will be no $200m or whatever deals for the exclusive tyre advertising rights at GPs.

Might be OK for a season or two until one team locks into an exclusive deal with the winning tyre manufacturer and everyone else thinks - is this really worth it. OK, the racing only teams like Williams might stick around but not sure about manufacturer related teams - if there any left after current problems.

Might be OK for a season or two until one team locks into an exclusive deal with the winning tyre manufacturer and everyone else thinks - is this really worth it. OK, the racing only teams like Williams might stick around but not sure about manufacturer related teams - if there any left after current problems.

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing much of a disagreement with your position, but my real problem is with current regulations. Push for savings in wrong places, far too many, really annoying and counterproductive constrains, etc. This all was discussed elsewhere many times over in the past, and there is no point to rehash it all here again.